2007-02-25

As we all know, members of the religious right are up in arms about same-sex marriage, pushing most states to amended their constitutions to explicitly forbid the recognition of same-sex marriages. Massachusetts is the only state to buck the trend and recognize same-sex marriages. Many on the right call same-sex marriages as an abomination, a crime against God, a crime against nature and a fundamentally Wrong Idea. Heck, there is even a catchy phrase "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." Yet, I feel that the time has come for the religious right to not just tolerate same-sex marriages but even embrace them. Why?

Well, let us go back in history and see what marriages were like 2000 years ago. The poor did not have much and most of them perhaps did not even go through any proper ceremony to get married. The rich and powerful, on the other hand, saw marriages as an instrument to solidify and further their position in society. Kings and princes married wisely, hoping to inherit some lands through their wives. Merchants married off their daughters to potential business partners. In many cultures, marriages were decided long before the bride or the groom could entertain any contrarian thoughts. Love did not figure in the equation. The couple getting married were just pawns in the chess game played by their families.

But as the society has evolved, love has come to play a role in marriages. People are now expected to fall for someone, not simply paired up in a business transaction. That has led to inter-religion as well as inter-racial marriages (perhaps the most famous being between Mr. and Mrs. Loving).

So, what does this have to do with same-sex marriages? Well, the other trend that keeps a lot of priests and other religious leaders up at night is that many young people are foregoing marriage altogether. They have seen love go out of many a marriage and the aftershocks of a divorce scare them. So, people are living together, having children, maintaining a life as close to being married as possible but there is no marriage. If this trend takes hold, who would get married? The 10% who are truly religious? That would lead to another problem...

You see, the federal, state and local governments give many privileges (roughly 1,100!) to married couples that they don't give to unmarried couples, most famous being the ability to inherit from a spouse without paying any inheritance tax (and more importantly, automatically). So, as people start skipping the marriage part, they are going to find themselves in various legal limbos when they want to make medical decisions or trying to enroll their children in school. And so these unmarrieds are going to start demanding the same rights as married couples...

Do you see where I am going? By denying the same-sex couples these "married rights", the religious right is making it more likely that some of these "married rights" shall end up being granted to cohabiting couples as well. The people on the right should try to nip this problem in the bud by ending their opposition to gay marriage to make sure that marriage as an institution (and as a grantor of various rights and privileges) survives. After all, the gays are trying to follow the same process that everyone else has for many generations (be a kid, study hard, grow up, get married, have kids, help them grow up, enjoy grandkids...). Sure, some churches may face a schism much like the one faced by Episcopalians today, but things do work out in the end. After all, slavery, interracial marriages and civil rights have led to schisms in the past...

About Me

I am a software engineer in Silicon Valley and here are glimpses of my thinking. I have lived in a few countries and various parts of USA and therefore, my writings would tend to reference various locations and people...
Words of encouragement to blog AT terway.com